Heidi Heitkamp

I mean, think, if you are sitting there and all of a sudden out of the blue you are trying to decide what to do, and you get an email from someone saying, 'Hey, I heard you are an aerospace graduate at UND. NASA has some openings.'

I am very pleased that finally, after a lot of planning and a lot of discussion, we are holding this hearing entitled 'Understanding the Millennial Perspective in Deciding to Pursue and Remain in Federal Employment.'

Every month Senator Carper goes to the floor and puts up a picture and talks about an enormous contribution of Federal employee has made to the safety or security or just to improving the quality of life in America.

I think we wait around for it to come to us, is my point, and we do not do enough to reach out.

If in 2019, 30 percent of the workforce that is working today is not working, everybody retires when they can retire. Are you ready for that?

But I think sometimes you take someone from Chicago and say here you are in Cavalier, North Dakota, and that is culture shock.

How do we get this message into the community? And, how do we build those relationships long term?

If we are going to have a logical discussion about issues regarding immigration, we need to take a new look at border security.

I think we can double our impact on the border if we continue to advance the work that this Administration has started with the Canadian Government.

Many of the communities that I visit with tell me that they feel under siege.

I think you saw there the dramatic increase in the amount of drug crime, in particular, but also sexual assaults.

I do not think, given what we know right now, a delay to the end of the year is asking too much.

Yes. I do not care what the answer is; just give me an answer so that I have certainty.

I think one of my concerns--and it goes back to what I said, longstanding agency interpretation and deference.

We still have not satisfied the public that they have had adequate input in this process.

I could see doing something where you say, well, you might consider this, you might consider that; here are some things that we would consider appropriate.

It looks and reads to me like guidance is being used as 'rulemaking light.'

I do believe that there are things that are done at the IRS that need maybe a second look.

And, it just keeps getting to that point where had you started with a rulemaking process, you would have a firmer foundation for this whole structure that you have created.

There has to be some flexibility that they have because they have to make those determinations.

When we change how we interpret either rules or statutes, and the change has a dramatic impact on the livelihood of business people, we get a little suspicious that that does not look much like a guidance and it is not a legitimate new…

I think that guidance is extraordinarily valuable.

I think that the overtime as it relates to on-call is very problematic.

Is that really the kind of relationship we want with the public as it relates to an interpretive change?

I think you did less than what was required.